Open-access Conceptualizing digital transformation using semantic decomposition

Conceptualizando transformación digital por medio de descomposición semántica

Abstract

Economic and social disruption generated by COVID-19 increased research on digital transformation processes; however, consensus about the formal conceptual definition of digital transformation is yet to be reached. A concise and clear concept built using existing definitions in literature is needed for empirical research in the business and management fields. Using semantic decomposition method to systematically decompose the extant definitions collected from the business literature, this study proposes the following formal conceptual definition of digital transformation: “a process that aims to improve society by triggering significant changes to the enterprise business model using digital technologies”. Consistent measurable properties caused by a formal conceptual definition support academic research and enable practitioners to exploit new knowledge essential when adapting the firm's business model to the new digital reality.

Keywords: Digital transformation; definition; semantic decomposition

Resumen

La disrupción económica y social generada por el COVID-19 incrementó la investigación y nuestro conocimiento sobre la transformación digital; sin embargo, carecemos de una definición formal conceptual de transformación digital. Un concepto claro y conciso, a partir de definiciones existentes en la literatura, es necesario para la investigación empírica en el campo de gerencia y negocios. Utilizar el método de descomposición semántica nos permite alcanzar el objetivo de investigación y construir una definición formal conceptual manejable y fácil de entender, donde se define la transformación digital como “un proceso que tiene como objetivo mejorar la sociedad desencadenando cambios significativos en el modelo de negocio de las empresas a través del uso de tecnologías digitales”. Los resultados consistentes y medibles que genera una definición formal conceptual apuntalan la investigación académica y permiten a los profesionales explotar nuevo conocimiento esencial al momento de adaptar el modelo de negocio a la nueva realidad digital.

Palabras clave: Transformación digital; definición; descomposición semántica

1. Introduction

The world is facing a digital transformation (DT) triggered by the intensified prevalence and use of digital technologies that are fundamentally changing organizations and economies. Today's information age is dependent on different technologies based on the development of big data, algorithms, cloud computing, and social networks (Acs et al., 2022), and the market success of many businesses-whose competitive advantage mostly relies on digital technologies-is highly conditioned by their participation in digital platforms (Lafuente et al., 2022). However, the notion of DT is both theoretically and empirically underspecified (van Meeteren et al., 2022). Firms realize the potential of DT, but they can hardly tackle the challenges or achieve the maximum benefits of DT (Ellström et al., 2022). More literature is needed to uniformly define DT and help governments and private sectors develop the knowledge and abilities needed to rapidly adapt to the disruptive changes faced by businesses as a result of DT (Kraus, et al., 2021a). Although the term DT is frequently used in business research and marketing, scholars disagree on a common definition (Siachou et al., 2021). DT is not limited to particular innovative businesses such as digital start-ups and high-tech giants; it is rather a process that embraces companies of all sizes from diverse industries (Bresciani et al., 2021). For instance, for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), an approach that reduce the underlying complexity of DT projects into manageable and easy-to-understand steps, rather than abstract frameworks, is highly demanded (Barann et al., 2019).

Casual everyday language is not precise enough for formal empirical research; a scientific field must develop artificial languages to increase the precision of empirical testing (Wacker, 2004). For example, Vial (2019) uses semantic analysis to build a conceptual definition of DT based on literatures on Information Systems and suggests it can be replicated in other disciplines where DT is relevant.

The discussion around DT in business and management is still open (Bresciani et al., 2021). According to Vial's (2019) call, this study aims at building a concise and clear concept of DT using existing definitions in the academic literature to provide appropriate and consistent measurable properties (Wacker, 2004), especially for the business and management domains.

A concise and clear concept of DT can help the consolidation of future applied research on business models and the design of structured frameworks for adapting business processes to digitalization. Moreover, conceptual clarity on DT is essential for equipping scholars and social planners with valid measurement instruments to strengthen research and policy action plans. For instance, governments should develop policies that facilitate the digitalization of society and economic activities (Lafuente et al., 2022), therefore, they have the responsibility of designing digital infrastructures and regulations that increase the efficiency of digital markets (Acs et al., 2022).

The research question of this proposal is the following: is the business literature sufficient to develop a conceptual definition of DT based on previous definitions?

2. Theoretical framework

The rise of smart devices and social media platforms has led to drastic changes in the way customers communicate with businesses, and in customers' expectations to businesses' response times and multi-channel availability (Schallmo et al., 2017). In 2005, just 500 million devices were connected to the Internet; 10 years later there were 8 billion; by 2030, it's estimated that 1 trillion devices will be connected (WEF, 2016). Digital technologies are becoming an integral part of individuals' lives and organizations' work routines, and digitalization is continuously impacting the economy and society (Gimpel et al., 2018). Digitalization is the cause of large-scale transformations across multiple aspects of business, providing unparalleled opportunities for value creation (Weinelt, 2016). Research has shown that technology itself is only a part of the complex puzzle organizations need to solve to remain competitive in a digital world (Vial, 2019). The journey to digital maturity requires a whole-hearted commitment from a company's leadership and sustained investment in people, capabilities, technology, and cultural change (Catlin et al., 2015).

According to Matarazzo et al. (2021) , research focused on DT in SMEs and how digitalization may change the entire process of consumer value creation is still limited, but they identify digitalization as a prerequisite for DT. Autio et al. (2018) associate transformative effects and business model (BM) innovation with digitalization; Verhoef et al. (2021) reserve these characteristics for DT. Kane et al. (2015) find the advantages of digitalization strategic, and not merely technological.

In general, there is frequent interchangeability between terms associated to DT (e.g., DT, digitalization, and business process reengineering) as well as a variety of variables, characteristics, and constructs affecting the conceptualization of DT (e.g., type of organization, industry, areas where digital information applies, organizations' legacy and capabilities, organizations' BM, and organizations' experience with information technology and systems) (Siachou et al., 2021). Although digital changes have been thoroughly investigated by academics, DT, digitalization, and digitization are terms that are often used interchangeably by management scholars (Caputo et al., 2021).

Amongst other definitions, the term DT is used today to signify the transformational or disruptive implications of digital technologies for businesses (Jafari-Sadeghi et al., 2021). For Legner et al. (2017) , DT describes the changes brought about by information technologies as a means to automatize tasks. However, Andriole (2017) said that DT is not a software upgrade or a supply chain improvement project, but a planned digital shock to what there may be a reasonably functioning system.

There is currently no commonly accepted definition for the term DT (Schallmo et al., 2017). Vial (2019) reveals that circularity, unclear terminology, and the conflation of concepts and their impacts-among other challenges-hinder the conceptual clarity of DT. Proposing a novel definition is only the first step toward developing a better understanding of the phenomenon (Trischler & Li-Ying, 2022). The challenges of DT have gained attention from both academics and practitioners (Favoretto et al., 2021).

DT initiatives have been thoroughly investigated in this recent period (Gregurec et al., 2021) even though a formal concept remains undefined. Although definitions are never complete, unequivocal, or fully formalized, that does not mean that any or all definitions should be equally acceptable (Wacker, 2004). It is often the case that satisfying definitions cannot be found about words or concepts that are rarely used or have been newly created (Li et al., 2020). The meanings of those expressions are usually consulted from the immediate local context, on dictionaries, research documents, or the web to support interpretations and compare them to more global contexts (Ishiwatari et al., 2019).

In the case of formal conceptual definitions, few terms are preferred to convey the essence of the concept (Wacker, 2004). Li et al. (2020) propose to explicitly decompose the meaning of words into semantic components for definition generation. Wierzbicka (1996) proposes that different languages share a set of atomic concepts that cannot be further decomposed, i.e., semantic primitives by which all complex concepts can be semantically composed. Primitive terms have also been described in academic circles as terms that are not defined but are assumed to be understood by the academic field (Wacker, 2004).

3. Methodology

To build a manageable, easy-to-understand formal conceptual definition of digital transformation, Wolfswinkel et al.'s (2013) five-stage process is proposed to conduct a rigorous literature review. This process allows to (1) define the scope of the review; (2) search the literature; (3) select the final sample; (4) analyze the corpus; and (5) present the findings (Vial, 2019). Web of Science and Scopus databases are used for the initial queries as recommended by Tijjani et al. (2020) . To confirm the inclusion of all the relevant studies, the results were also cross-validated (Fakhar Manesh et al., 2021) in Google Scholar. The analysis consisted of the collection of definitions of DT and other related concepts.

After analyzing the existing definitions of DT in the academic literature, 17 unique definitions were selected. Since academic journals are not the only sources of knowledge (Mohammed et al., 2015), other professional sources such as SAP Insights (2021) and PwC (2013) were also accessed which provided an integrative view of the state of the art on DT (Kraus, et al., 2021b). Exploring those sources allowed to obtain the practitioners' point of view.

Following Ishiwatari et al. (2019) , whose experiment is intended to describe unfamiliar words, phrases, polysemous words, rarely used idioms, or emerging entities (such as DT) through the Oxford dictionary, a “dataset newly created” from Wikipedia was also used. Finally, following Gadetsky et al. (2018) , who collects a dataset of definitions using OxfordDictionaries.com API, definitions in the Oxford Dictionary (n.d.), Wikipedia (n.d.), and Cambridge Dictionary (n.d.) were also collected by relating term searches to digital transformation.

A clear, concise definition of DT was derived using semantic decomposition (Akmajian et al., 2017), a process that aims at breaking down groups of words, single words or even morphemes into a series of primitives (Vial, 2019). Rules for formal conceptual definitions imply that a concept must be defined using primitive and derived terms to assure that terms are assumed to be known by individuals (Wacker, 2004).

4. Results

After following the five-stage process for a rigorous literature review, 19 unique definitions of DT were found. Although, this relatively small number reflects an overall enthusiasm toward the phenomenon of DT at the expense of conceptual clarity. Some of these definitions were created by research groups while others considered parts of previously published definitions. The definition by Barann et al. (2019) , considers DT “as the continuous digitalization process of a company, which uses digital and data-driven innovation to improve existing processes, change distinct BM elements, or reinvent its BM entirely”. Other definitions were built by combining existing pieces of knowledge (Wang et al., 2017), since “the term DT is used today to signify the transformational or disruptive implications of digital technologies for businesses and society” (Jafari-Sadeghi et al., 2021; Matt et al., 2016; Nambisan et al., 2018).

Academic journals are not the only sources of knowledge (Mohammed et al., 2015). Two definitions were retrieved from professional sources; PwC (2013) describes DT “as the fundamental transformation of the entire business world through the establishment of new technologies based on the internet with a fundamental impact on society as a whole”. SAP Insights (2021) indicates that DT “involves integrating digital technologies and solutions into every area of a business. This is as much a cultural change as a technological one as it requires organizations to make fundamental shifts in the ways they operate and how they deliver customer experiences and benefits. Digital solutions also help increase the workforce and can lead to business process and business model transformation”.

The Oxford Dictionary (n.d.) search retrieved no exact match for “digital transformation” in Academic English. The Cambridge Dictionary (n.d.) search suggested “digitalisation” for digital transformation, among other words, while the Wikipedia (n.d.) dataset referred the result to “digitization”.

The 19 definitions of DT retrieved for this research were analyzed to determine the essence of DT concepts by following the Wacker (2004) guidelines for conceptual definitions (Table 1).

Table 1:
Guidelines for conceptual definitions

Each definition was, then, broken down into its constituents in order to identify their primitives, following the semantic decomposition process described by Vial (2019) . Those primitives were (1) the target entity, i.e., the unit of analysis affected by DT; (2) the scope, i.e., the extent of the changes taking place within the target entity's properties; (3) the means, i.e., the elements involved in creating the change within the target entity (4) the expected outcome, i.e., innovation of the BM (see Table 2). A conceptual definition of DT was finally derived from the resulting properties. DT is defined “as a process that aims to improve society by triggering significant changes to the enterprise business model using digital technologies”.

Table 2:
Extracting primitives for the concept of digital transformation

5. Discussion and conclusions

To answer our research question: is the business literature sufficient to develop a conceptual definition of DT based on previous definitions?

Research on DT has raised vast interest among academics in recent decades (Kraus et al., 2022), but a clear definition of DT is still unaccounted for (Schallmo et al., 2017). The literature shows a growing number of publications dedicated to DT in the fields of business and management (Kraus et al., 2022), offering several DT definitions, without common concurrences (Chawla & Goyal, 2022). An introduction to a concise and clear DT concept, built using extant definitions in the literature, is highly desired. We experienced limitations when searching for DT definitions in sources different from journals, such as dictionaries.

Although in most the of definitions of the sample the target-primitive entity refers to businesses or enterprises, the resulting definition suggested by this article is not focused on businesses only. Given the increasing importance of DT and its effects on companies and societies, as well (Kraus et al., 2022), the definition proposed focuses on society as a whole. DT is shaping profound changes in societies (Matarazzo et al., 2021); Kraus et al. (2022) consider that relevant future research should move beyond the benefits of DT on individual companies and focus on its societal impacts.

The definition proposed recognizes improvement as an expected result of DT, without guaranteeing its realization. For DT to be successful, DT should become a strategic priority in the organization (Chawla & Goyal, 2022).

A final characteristic of the proposed definition is intended to reinforce its conceptual clarity and make it applicable to the business world; it includes the term BM into its structure. DT calls for the renewing and readjustment of BM to challenge conventional ways of doing business (Hadjielias et al., 2021).

Five of the definitions used to construct this formal conceptual definition are part of the most highly cited DT articles in Web of Science (see Table 3). Those papers are: Verhoef et al. (2021) , Warner & Wäger (2019) , Jafari-Sadeghi et al. (2021) , Kraus et al. (2022) and Frank et al. (2019) . As of July/August 2022, those highly cited papers received enough citations in Web of Science Core Collection to place them in the top 1% of the academic field of Economics & Business or Social Sciences based on a highly cited threshold for the field and publication year (Clarivate, 2022). Verhoef et al. (2021) is a “hot paper”, which means it was published in the past two years and received enough citations in Web of Science Core Collection in July/August 2022 to place it in the top 0.1% of papers in the academic field of Economics & Business (Clarivate, 2022). Although it seems that the number of definitions retrieved is low, they mostly come from highly cited articles from good indexing and ranking journals, which allows a good definition, which, according to Wacker (2004) , should be a concise, clear verbal expression of a unique concept that can be used for strict empirical testing.

Table 3:
DT definitions from highly cited articles in Web of Science

Kraus et al. (2022) call for more research aimed at developing a universal definition of the term DT from the perspective of business and management. This article answers that call, contributing to scholars and practitioners. According to Wacker (2004) having a formal conceptual definition is the prior step for developing measurement instruments since clear definitions lead to better conceptual characteristics and, ultimately, to meaningful statistically valid measures. A DT definition that supports measurement instruments will benefit scholars with better tools for better research in the emergent field of DT. There is also a need for research aimed at developing qualitative and quantitative measures that companies could use to assess the success of their DT efforts. These could be crucial for smaller companies. Despite all the talk about DT in developed and emerging economies and across all industries, the reality is that DT is only as useful if its implementation results in return on investment, benefits in terms of efficiency, effectiveness, cost-savings, competitive advantage, and decision-making (Marks et al., 2020). Future research may use this formal conceptual definition to create measurement instruments to develop empirical studies on DT and on Organizational Impact (Chawla & Goyal, 2022), addressed especially to SMEs' business model transformation. To measure DT's impact on society is also highly recommended.

References

  • Acs, Z. J., Lafuente, E., & Szerb, L. (2022). A note on the configuration of the digital ecosystem in Latin America. Tec Empresarial, 16(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.18845/te.v16i1.5926
    » https://doi.org/10.18845/te.v16i1.5926
  • Akmajian, A., Farmer, A. K., Bickmore, L., Demers, R. A., & Harnish, R. M. (2017). Linguistics: An introduction to language and communication (Seventh Edition). MIT press.
  • Andriole, S. J. (2017). Five myths about digital transformation. MIT Sloan Management Review, 58(3), 16-22.
  • Autio, E., Nambisan, S., Thomas, L. D. W., & Wright, M. (2018). Digital affordances, spatial affordances, and the genesis of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 12(1), 72-95. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1266
    » https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1266
  • Barann, B., Hermann, A., Cordes, A.-K., Chasin, F., & Becker, J. (2019). Supporting digital transformation in Small and Medium-sized Enterprises: a procedure model involving publicly funded support units. https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2019.598
    » https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2019.598
  • Bowersox, D. J., Closs, D. J., & Drayer, R. W. (2005). The digital transformation: Technology and beyond. Supply Chain Management Review, 9(1), 22-29.
  • Bresciani, S., Huarng, K.-H., Malhotra, A., & Ferraris, A. (2021). Digital transformation as a springboard for product, process and business model innovation. Journal of Business Research, 128, 204-210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.02.003
    » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.02.003
  • Cambridge Dictionary. (n.d.). In Digital transformation-Did you spell it correctly. Alternative spellings in the British English Dictionary-Cambridge Dictionary (US). Retrieved October 7. 2021, from 2021, from https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/spellcheck/english/
    » https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/spellcheck/english/
  • Caputo, A., Pizzi, S., Pellegrini, M. M., & Dabić, M. (2021). Digitalization and business models: Where are we going? A science map of the field. Journal of Business Research, 123, 489-501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.09.053
    » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.09.053
  • Catlin, T., Jay, S., & Paul, W. (2015). Raising your digital quotient | McKinsey. https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/raising-your-digital-quotient#
    » https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/raising-your-digital-quotient#
  • Chawla, R. N., & Goyal, P. (2022). Emerging trends in digital transformation: A bibliometric analysis. Benchmarking-an International Journal, 29(4), 1069-1112. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-01-2021-0009
    » https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-01-2021-0009
  • Clarivate. (2022). Citation Thresholds. http://esi.help.clarivate.com/Content/citation-thresholds.htm
    » http://esi.help.clarivate.com/Content/citation-thresholds.htm
  • Clohessy, T., Acton, T., & Morgan, L. (2017). The impact of cloud-based digital transformation on IT service providers: Evidence from Focus Groups. International Journal of Cloud Applications and Computing, 7(4), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJCAC.2017100101
    » https://doi.org/10.4018/IJCAC.2017100101
  • Crupi, A., Del Sarto, N., Di Minin, A., Gregori, G. L., Lepore, D., Marinelli, L., & Spigarelli, F. (2020). The digital transformation of SMEs-A new knowledge broker called the digital innovation hub. Journal of Knowledge Management, 24(6), 1263-1288. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-11-2019-0623
    » https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-11-2019-0623
  • Demirkan, H., Spohrer, J. C., & Welser, J. J. (2016). Digital innovation and strategic transformation. IT Professional, 18(6), 14-18. https://doi.org/10.1109/MITP.2016.115
    » https://doi.org/10.1109/MITP.2016.115
  • Ellström, D., Holtström, J., Berg, E., & Josefsson, C. (2022). Dynamic capabilities for digital transformation. Journal of Strategy and Management, 15(2), 272-286. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSMA-04-2021-0089
    » https://doi.org/10.1108/JSMA-04-2021-0089
  • Fakhar-Manesh, M., Pellegrini, M. M., Marzi, G., & Dabic, M. (2021). Knowledge Management in the fourth industrial revolution: mapping the literature and scoping future avenues. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 68(1), 289-300. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2019.2963489
    » https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2019.2963489
  • Favoretto, C., Mendes, G. H. S., Filho, M. G., Gouvea de Oliveira, M., & Ganga, G. M. D. (2021). Digital transformation of business model in manufacturing companies: challenges and research agenda. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 37 (4), 748-767 https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-10-2020-0477
    » https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-10-2020-0477
  • Fitzgerald, M., Kruschwitz, N., Bonnet, D., & Welch, M. (2014). Embracing digital technology: A new strategic imperative. MIT Sloan Management Review, 55(2), 1.
  • Frank, A. G., Mendes, G. H. S., Ayala, N. F., & Ghezzi, A. (2019). Servitization and Industry 4.0 convergence in the digital transformation of product firms: A business model innovation perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 141, 341-351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.01.014
    » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.01.014
  • Gadetsky, A., Yakubovskiy, I., & Vetrov, D. (2018). Conditional generators of words definitions. ArXiv Preprint ArXiv:1806.10090. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1806.10090
    » https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1806.10090
  • Gimpel, H., Hosseini, S., Huber, R. X. R., Probst, L., Röglinger, M., & Faisst, U. (2018). structuring digital transformation: a framework of action fields and its application at ZEISS. Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application, 19(1), 3.
  • Gregurec, I., Tomičić Furjan, M., & Tomičić-Pupek, K. (2021). The Impact of COVID-19 on Sustainable Business Models in SMEs. Sustainability, 13(3), 1098 https://doi.org/10.3390/su13031098
    » https://doi.org/10.3390/su13031098
  • Guinan, P. J., Parise, S., & Langowitz, N. (2019). Creating an innovative digital project team: levers to enable digital transformation. Business Horizons, 62(6), 717-727. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2019.07.005
    » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2019.07.005
  • Haaker, T., Ly, P. T. M., Nguyen-Thanh, N., & Nguyen, H. T. H. (2021). Business model innovation through the application of the Internet-of-Things: A comparative analysis. Journal of Business Research, 126, 126-136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.12.034
    » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.12.034
  • Hadjielias, E., Dada, O., Discua Cruz, A., Zekas, S., Christofi, M., & Sakka, G. (2021). How do digital innovation teams' function? Understanding the team cognition-process nexus within the context of digital transformation. Journal of Business Research, 122, 373-386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.08.045
    » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.08.045
  • Iansiti, M., & Lakhani, K. R. (2014). Digital ubiquity: How connections, sensors, and data are revolutionizing business. Harvard Business Review, 92(11), 19.
  • Ishiwatari, S., Hayashi, H., Yoshinaga, N., Neubig, G., Sato, S., Toyoda, M., & Kitsuregawa, M. (2019). Learning to describe unknown phrases with local and global contexts. Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1, 3467-3476.
  • Jafari-Sadeghi, V., Garcia-Perez, A., Candelo, E., & Couturier, J. (2021). Exploring the impact of digital transformation on technology entrepreneurship and technological market expansion: The role of technology readiness, exploration and exploitation. Journal of Business Research, 124, 100-111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.11.020
    » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.11.020
  • Kagermann, H., Helbig, J., Hellinger, A., & Wahlster, W. (2013). Recommendations for implementing the strategic initiative Industrie 4.0: Securing the future of German manufacturing industry; final report of the Industrie 4.0 Working Group, Forschungsunion. http://gateway-bayern.de/BV041628398
    » http://gateway-bayern.de/BV041628398
  • Kane, G. C., Palmer, D., Phillips, A. N., Kiron, D., & Buckley, N. (2015). Strategy, not technology, drives digital transformation. MIT Sloan Management Review and Deloitte University Press. https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/fr/Documents/strategy/dup_strategy-not-technology-drives-digital-transformation.pdf
    » https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/fr/Documents/strategy/dup_strategy-not-technology-drives-digital-transformation.pdf
  • Kraus, S., Durst, S., Ferreira, J. J., Veiga, P., Kailer, N., & Weinmann, A. (2022). Digital transformation in business and management research: An overview of the current status quo. International Journal of Information Management, 63, 102466. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102466
    » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102466
  • Kraus, S., Jones, P., Kailer, N., Weinmann, A., Chaparro-Banegas, N., & Roig-Tierno, N. (2021a). Digital Transformation: an overview of the current state of the art of research. SAGE Open, 11(3), 21582440211047576. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211047576
    » https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211047576
  • Kraus, S., Schiavone, F., Pluzhnikova, A., & Invernizzi, A. C. (2021b). Digital transformation in healthcare: Analyzing the current state-of-research. Journal of Business Research, 123, 557-567. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.10.030
    » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.10.030
  • Lafuente, E., Ács, Z. J., & Szerb, L. (2022). Analysis of the digital platform economy around the world: A network DEA model for identifying policy priorities. Journal of Small Business Management, in press. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2022.2100895
    » https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2022.2100895
  • Legner, C., Eymann, T., Hess, T., Matt, C., Böhmann, T., Drews, P., Maedche, A., Urbach, N., & Ahlemann, F. (2017). Digitalization: opportunity and challenge for the business and information systems engineering community. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 59, 301-308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-017-0484-2
    » https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-017-0484-2
  • Li, J., Bao, Y., Huang, S., Dai, X., & Chen, J. (2020). Explicit Semantic Decomposition for Definition Generation. Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 708-717. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.65
    » https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.65
  • Marks, A., AL-Ali, M., Atassi, R., Abualkishik, A. Z., & Rezgui, Y. (2020). Digital transformation in higher education: A framework for maturity assessment. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 11(12), 61.81 https://doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2020.0111261
    » https://doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2020.0111261
  • Matarazzo, M., Penco, L., Profumo, G., & Quaglia, R. (2021). Digital transformation and customer value creation in Made in Italy SMEs: A dynamic capabilities perspective. Journal of Business Research, 123, 642-656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.10.033
    » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.10.033
  • Matt, C., Hess, T., Benlian, A., & Wiesbock, F. (2016). Options for formulating a digital transformation strategy. MIS Quarterly Executive, 15(2). https://aisel.aisnet.org/misqe/vol15/iss2/6
    » https://aisel.aisnet.org/misqe/vol15/iss2/6
  • Mazzone, D. M. (2014). Digital or death: Digital transformation: the only choice for business to survive smash and conquer Smashbox Consulting Inc.
  • Mohammed, I., Denizci Guillet, B., & Law, R. (2015). The contributions of economics to hospitality literature: A content analysis of hospitality and tourism journals. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 44, 99-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.10.010
    » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.10.010
  • Morakanyane, R., Grace, A. A., & O'Reilly, P. (2017). Conceptualizing digital transformation in business organizations: a systematic review of literature. Bled EConference, 21. https://doi.org/10.18690/978-961-286-043-1.30
    » https://doi.org/10.18690/978-961-286-043-1.30
  • Nambisan, S., Siegel, D., & Kenney, M. (2018). On open innovation, platforms, and entrepreneurship. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 12(3), 354-368. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1300
    » https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1300
  • Oxford Dictionary. (n.d.) In Learner's Dictionary of Academic English at OxfordLearnersDictionaries.com. Retrieved October 7, 2021, from Retrieved October 7, 2021, from https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/spellcheck/academic/?q=digital+transformation
    » https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/spellcheck/academic/?q=digital+transformation
  • Paavola, R., Hallikainen, P., & Elbanna, A. (2017). Role of middle managers in modular digital transformation: The case of SERVU. Conference: European Conference of Information Systems (ECIS).
  • Pagani, M., & Pardo, C. (2017). The impact of digital technology on relationships in a business network. Industrial Marketing Management, 67, 185-192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.08.009
    » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.08.009
  • Piccinini, E., Gregory, R. W., & Kolbe, L. M. (2015). Changes in the producer-consumer relationship-towards digital transformation. Changes, 3(4), 1634-1648. https://aisel.aisnet.org/wi2015/109
    » https://aisel.aisnet.org/wi2015/109
  • PwC. (2013). Digital Transformation-The biggest change since the industrial revolution PricewaterhouseCoopers.
  • SAP Insights. (2021, January 11). What is digital transformation? SAP Insights. https://insights.sap.com/what-is-digital-transformation/
    » https://insights.sap.com/what-is-digital-transformation/
  • Saul, C. J., & Gebauer, H. (2018). Digital transformation as an enabler for advanced services in the sanitation sector. Sustainability, 10(3), 752. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030752
    » https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030752
  • Schallmo, D., Williams, C. A., & Boardman, L. (2017). Digital transformation of business models-Best practice, enablers, and roadmap. International Journal of Innovation Management, 21(08), 1740014. https://doi.org/10.1142/S136391961740014X
    » https://doi.org/10.1142/S136391961740014X
  • Siachou, E., Vrontis, D., & Trichina, E. (2021). Can traditional organizations be digitally transformed by themselves? The moderating role of absorptive capacity and strategic interdependence. Journal of Business Research, 124, 408-421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.11.011
    » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.11.011
  • Stolterman, E., & Fors, A. C. (2004). Information Technology and the good life. In B. Kaplan, D. P. Truex, D. Wastell, A. T. Wood-Harper, & J. I. DeGross (Eds.), Information Systems Research: Relevant Theory and Informed Practice (pp. 687-692). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-8095-6_45
    » https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-8095-6_45
  • Tijjani, B., Ashiq, M., Siddique, N., Khan, M. A., & Rasul, A. (2020). A bibliometric analysis of quality research papers in Islamic finance: Evidence from Web of Science. ISRA International Journal of Islamic Finance, 13(1), 84-101. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJIF-03-2020-0056
    » https://doi.org/10.1108/IJIF-03-2020-0056
  • Trischler, M. F. G., & Li-Ying, J. (2022). Digital business model innovation: Toward construct clarity and future research directions. Review of Managerial Science https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-021-00508-2
    » https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-021-00508-2
  • van Meeteren, M., Trincado-Munoz, F., Rubin, T. H., & Vorley, T. (2022). Rethinking the digital transformation in knowledge-intensive services: A technology space analysis. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 179, 121631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121631
    » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121631
  • Verhoef, P. C., Broekhuizen, T., Bart, Y., Bhattacharya, A., Qi Dong, J., Fabian, N., & Haenlein, M. (2021). Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary reflection and research agenda. Journal of Business Research, 122, 889-901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.09.022
    » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.09.022
  • Vial, G. (2019). Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28(2), 118-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2019.01.003
    » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2019.01.003
  • Wacker, J. G. (2004). A theory of formal conceptual definitions: Developing theory-building measurement instruments. Journal of Operations Management, 22(6), 629-650. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2004.08.002
    » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2004.08.002
  • Wang, J., Veugelers, R., & Stephan, P. (2017). Bias against novelty in science: A cautionary tale for users of bibliometric indicators. Research Policy, 46(8), 1416-1436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.06.006
    » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.06.006
  • Warner, K. S., & Wäger, M. (2019). Building dynamic capabilities for digital transformation: An ongoing process of strategic renewal. Long Range Planning, 52(3), 326-349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2018.12.001
    » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2018.12.001
  • WEF. (2016). Digital Enterprise-World Economic Forum White Paper Digital Transformation of Industries: In collaboration with Accenture. Geneva - Bing. https://www.accenture.com/_acnmedia/accenture/conversion-assets/wef/pdf/accenture-digital-enterprise.pdf
    » https://www.accenture.com/_acnmedia/accenture/conversion-assets/wef/pdf/accenture-digital-enterprise.pdf
  • Weinelt, B. (2016). Digital Transformation of industries. World Economic Forum. https://www.accenture.com/_acnmedia/accenture/conversion-assets/wef/pdf/accenture-digital-enterprise.pdf
    » https://www.accenture.com/_acnmedia/accenture/conversion-assets/wef/pdf/accenture-digital-enterprise.pdf
  • Wierzbicka, A. (1996). Semantics: Primes and universals: Primes and universals Oxford University Press.
  • Wikipedia. (n.d.). In Wikipedia. Retrieved October 7. 2021, from 2021, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Digital_transformation&oldid=1072322578
    » https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Digital_transformation&oldid=1072322578
  • Wolfswinkel, J. F., Furtmueller, E., & Wilderom, C. P. M. (2013). Using grounded theory as a method for rigorously reviewing literature. European Journal of Information Systems, 22(1), 45-55. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2011.51
    » https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2011.51

Publication Dates

  • Date of issue
    Sep-Dec 2023

History

  • Received
    14 Jan 2023
  • Accepted
    08 July 2023
location_on
None Escuela de Administración de Empresas del Tecnológico de Costa Rica, Cartago, Cartago, CR, 159-7050, 506 25509052, (506)-2550-2248 - E-mail: jleiva@tec.ac.cr
rss_feed Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS
Acessibilidade / Reportar erro